Commissioner will testify against 3 others in case involving Texas Open Meetings Act

A Montgomery County commissioner charged with conspiring to circumvent the Texas Open Meetings Act has agreed to testify against two other Commissioners Court members and a political consultant in their upcoming trial, according to the official's attorney.

Commissioner Jim Clark will be granted a pretrial diversion in exchange for his testimony against County Judge Craig Doyal, Commissioner Charlie Riley and political consultant Marc Davenport, said Conroe-based attorney E. Tay Bond, who represents Clark.

All four face charges of allegedly talking in private about the potential structure of a $280 million road bond referendum before placing it on the November 2015 ballot, where it passed. The defendants have denied the charges.

The four were indicted last June on one count each of the offense, a misdemeanor that carries up to six months in jail and a maximum $500 fine. It is unclear whether a guilty verdict or plea would force the elected officials to vacate their positions.

The trial is set to begin March 27 in the 221st state District Court in Montgomery County.

Bond confirmed Monday that Clark had worked out the agreement with Chris Downey, the special prosecutor handling the case.

Clark's case will be dismissed if he "lives up to the terms" of the diversion, Bond said. Some pretrial diversions require an admission of guilt, but that is not the case with Clark's agreement, the attorney added.

Bond noted Clark would be required to voluntarily complete training offered by the Texas attorney general's office regarding the open-meetings law, as well as provide information to Downey that he had completed the training. The attorney said Clark also will have to "testify truthfully" about the violation and retain a consultant to advise him and his staff about compliance with the law.

"I gave a true and honest testimony to the grand jury, and I believe the special prosecutors knew the truth when they heard it and were inspired to approach me through my attorney," Clark said in a written statement. "The other conditions of the agreement are fair, and I look forward to fulfilling these terms so that we can move forward from this event."

Downey was appointed special prosecutor after Montgomery County District Attorney Brett Ligon asked to recuse himself, citing conflicts of interest involving his office.

Information provided to the Conroe Courier showed dozens of emails among the county judge, certain members of Commissioners Court, Davenport and others, including members of The Woodlands-based Texas Patriots PAC, a tea party group that negotiated the framework of the bond package with the elected officials and political consultant.

The bond package did not include the controversial Woodlands Parkway extension, a proposal the tea party group opposes and that was credited with sinking a $350 million road bond measure in May 2015.

Houston defense attorney Rusty Hardin, who is representing Doyal, and Conroe defense attorney Steve Jackson, representing Davenport, said they don't blame Clark for taking the deal, but both look forward to questioning him on the stand. The two maintain their clients are not guilty.

"What is interesting is they are charged with conspiring to violate the act," Hardin said. "They aren't even charged with violating it. They are charged with reaching an agreement among themselves to violate the act, and Clark knows that is not true. Craig Doyal is not guilty. Charlie Riley is not guilty. Whatever Jim Clark says in order to help himself and save his own hide is not going to be anything that harms Craig Doyal."

Jackson said he has never seen such an agreement in his 24-year career.

"Usually, a pretrial diversion agreement typically comes with a confession," Jackson said. "However, there is no confession here. I do not believe, based on everything I have read, that anybody conspired to violate the Texas Open Meetings Act. In fact, it is quite the contrary. Everybody tried to be very careful to not do so and did nothing more than to try and benefit the county by eventually getting a road bond passed."